Canon EOS Rebel T7's are Next on the DSLR Schedule [CR2]

[AvTvM]

They should make one last Rebel - small size SL2 with 80D sensor including DPAF. Then abandon Rebel lineup and xxD-line and switch to EOS M only for crop cameras, except high-speed 7D II DSLR successor.

24 MP is just fine for APS-C, lenses to take advantage of higher rez are not there or too expensive/too large for most Rebel buyers.

 

[ahsanford]

12MP would be very popular with gear-savvy enthusiasts... if they gave it full sensor readout 4K recording.

So I would expect to see a Rebel with full sensor 4K sometime around 2030, after it trickles down from the Cinema line to the 1DX3, to the 5D6, to the 6D5, to the... What do they call it three revisions after the 90D?
And then eventually to the T14i.
Anyway, I think it's safe to say that "some day" they're going to put a 12MP sensor in a Rebel.

I corrected your post for you. John Q Hockeydad or Mary P Soccermom really don't give a damn about full sensor readout. They want sharper / more detailed / higher % of in-focus pictures than their cell phone can generate.

So a Rebel with lower resolving power than most cell phones is highly unlikely to occur, IMHO.

- A

 

[Tugela]

That's quite long time for myself hanging on original M. No M3 II(M5 without EVF)?
I'll definitely spend all my money on lenses, not having money for adequate camera body later. Also 24Mpx sweetspot is long in the tooth. How about 18/36Mpx differentiated models?

24mp is long in the tooth? What crop sensor camera has more then 24mp? Let alone significantly higher like 36mp?

That is exactly my point. No other APS camera except dead Samsung has more. Iteration after iteration, after iteration, we're hanging at 20-24Mpx. No low light beast or hi-res beast in crop camera class. That is boring, and not helping me to choose. How do you think I will upgrade when the next iteration will be again 24Mpx, or again the same FPS or whatever...

24Mp is the equivalent of 62MP full frame in terms of pixel density. which is probably why you're not seeing much greater than that.

P&S camera have much higher pixel densities than that.

 

[Tugela]

The Rebel seems unnecessary in today's market. They need to move on getting the Rebel moved to mirrorless (ala M10, M20, M30 etc).

The market disagrees with you. They regularly top Amazon's top sellers list. Rebels pay the bills and keep the lights on at Canon.

In fairness, that won't be forever. The market is changing, and I do believe the cell phone is devouring the standalone camera business for the non-enthusiast masses, the John Q Hockeydads and Mary P Soccermoms, if you will. But pulling the mirror out of the Rebel line isn't going to save it, because size isn't the reason people abandon standalone cameras.

People abandon standalone cameras because the camera in their pocket is (nearly) as good, and that speaks to not wanting to carry a second item around. No amount of camera thinning from a mirrorless redesign is going to satisfy that user need.

- A

People who but Rebels don't buy them because there is a mirror in it. I would hazard a guess that most of them are unaware that it uses a mirror, or that there is a difference between it and a MILC.

 

[Tugela]

i think a 12mp and 24mp sounds right for these

This beginner / family SLR category unfortunately tends to stack up MP against competitors as a first or possibly second value-making/decision-making priority. I think the upsides of a 12 MP sensor (better high ISO files, more shots captured for a given size of a card, etc.) would largely be lost on such a consumer level product and would not sell well at all, even if price was discounted.

So in this market segment, people seem to offer the 'right' MP count to be comparable. Of late, that figure has been 24 MP for Canon, Sony, Nikon, Fuji, Pentax. Everyone has a 24 MP rig, so those would appear to be table stakes to join that fray with a new model.

You can actually charge more to offer less pixels in APS-C, but only the speciality action market segment: enthusiast birders / wildlifers in the premium APS-C slot (D500, 7D2, etc.)

- A

12MP would be very popular... if they gave it full sensor readout 4K recording.

So I would expect to see a Rebel with full sensor 4K sometime around 2030, after it trickles down from the Cinema line to the 1DX3, to the 5D6, to the 6D5, to the... What do they call it three revisions after the 90D?
And then eventually to the T14i.
Anyway, I think it's safe to say that "some day" they're going to put a 12MP sensor in a Rebel.

They would be better off taking the Rebels into mirrorless IMO. Forget about 4K in a Rebel any time soon though, Canon does not have processors that are fast enough within the thermal envelope available in their cameras for a mass consumer product. Maybe with Digic 8 perhaps, but that will be 2018 or later.

Personally I think that any average Joe who buys a Rebel rather than one of the competing MILCs is making a poor and rather uninformed choice.

 

[ahsanford]

People who but Rebels don't buy them because there is a mirror in it. I would hazard a guess that most of them are unaware that it uses a mirror, or that there is a difference between it and a MILC.

Agree completely.

What I meant by a "pulling the mirror out of the Rebel line isn't going to save it" is that a lowering tide lowers all boats. People are not buying cameras at the same rate as last year just because it has a mirror in it, or because it's too thick. We know this because all camera sales are down in comparison to 2015, not just SLRs.

One might presume folks are not buying cameras at the same rate as last year because their cell phone is now doing a good enough job that they don't need the hassle of a standalone camera. Hence: pulling the Rebel's mirrors out is probably not going to do much to help sales.

- A

 

[-1]

I think while the 760D is cute its the successor would benefit from both MFA and a tilt screen instead of the swivel one. 24MP is oki for this kind of camera if the AA filter is modest in strength. Work is needed on noise and DR.

 

[bardamu]

My first DSLR was the 550D. It was a nice intro to `real' photography.

These days I no longer use it. But not because of MP or DR or lack of 4k, etc.

What happens with the XXXD series still interests me because I'm interested in the camera market in general. But I'm not surprised that it has stagnated a bit in the last few iterations.

But really, rather than more APS-C cameras can't we get some more APS-C lenses?? It wouldn't take much Canon, how about just a 24mm equiv prime (~15mm), 35mm equiv prime (~22mm) and most importantly an update to the 17-55 IS, e.g. a weather sealed 15-45mm f/2.8 IS. If the 7D iii gets released without any more progress on crop lenses then it'll be a bit of a disgrace really.

 

[-1]

But really, rather than more APS-C cameras can't we get some more APS-C lenses?? It wouldn't take much Canon, how about just a 24mm equiv prime (~15mm), 35mm equiv prime (~22mm) and most importantly an update to the 17-55 IS, e.g. a weather sealed 15-45mm f/2.8 IS. If the 7D iii gets released without any more progress on crop lenses then it'll be a bit of a disgrace really.

The 7D series should be considered more of a crop replacement for the APS-H cameras, the 1D series rather than being buffed up x0Ds. Thus you should find the that main resource for lenses suitable to them is the EF ones w or w o red ring.

 

[Bennymiata]

From my observations, being larger can be an advantage.
A lot of average people (not real photographers) buy a dslr because it looks like a real camera and they believe the quality of the photos, when the camera is permanently set one of the full auto modes, will be superior to their phone and better than from those toy cameras.
They want to look like a serious photographer, even if they aren't.

That's why there is a good market for Rebels. Their owners reckon they look the same as a 5dwhatever.
Their reasons for buying a dslr are quite different from real enthusiasts and pros and very few of them ever buy any extra lenses or much in the way of accessories, other than a uv filter and a bag.

 

[benkam]

Too many Rebels. The way to consumers' hearts (or wallets) is really to cut prices, possibly achievable by streamlining the product lines and therefore rationalizing production costs.

Make the decision for entry into Canon DSLR as simple as possible. Just keep two Rebel types:

1) the 700D/T5i as basic entry-level, price it as the 1300D/T6

2) the 760D/T6s as intermediate entry-level, priced as a 700D/T5i

The specs are fine. Its the slashing of prices that will for Canon hopefully stem the bleeding of their new user base and hope they later move up the range.

 

[asl]

Personally I think that any average Joe who buys a Rebel rather than one of the competing MILCs is making a poor and rather uninformed choice.

For one camera one lens setup, it does not make sense to get a rebel at the moment.

I am telling my self I did in 2008-2010, after that I have only bought lenses.
Of course if the new one has the new sensor (at least the dr) and good price is could be interesting for landscape for example fully articulating screen is nice.

 

[rrcphoto]

Too many Rebels. The way to consumers' hearts (or wallets) is really to cut prices, possibly achievable by streamlining the product lines and therefore rationalizing production costs.

Make the decision for entry into Canon DSLR as simple as possible. Just keep two Rebel types:

1) the 700D/T5i as basic entry-level, price it as the 1300D/T6

no they are not. so basically take a loss on the higher volume camera. good plan!

 

[rrcphoto]

Personally I think that any average Joe who buys a Rebel rather than one of the competing MILCs is making a poor and rather uninformed choice.

or you are making a poor and uninformed observation.

nothing beats canon's STM lineup out there in terms of range of focal from UWA to tele for a kit. the rebels are fairly compact, weigh less than canon's xxD series cameras or above, and Canon's EF-S STM lenses are the best bang for the buck out there. you can walk away with the 24, 50, 10-18 , 18-135, 55-250 and have a credible kit and not cost a significant amount of money.

I'd argue that someone getting a T6s as a starting point and expanding their APS-C kit from there is a pretty good decision and alot more informed than your post.

 

[rrcphoto]

Personally I think that any average Joe who buys a Rebel rather than one of the competing MILCs is making a poor and rather uninformed choice.

For one camera one lens setup, it does not make sense to get a rebel at the moment.

for a one lens setup it doesn't make sense to get ANY ILC camera.

the entire point of an ILC is to switch lenses.

 

[ahsanford]

Personally I think that any average Joe who buys a Rebel rather than one of the competing MILCs is making a poor and rather uninformed choice.

or you are making a poor and uninformed observation.

nothing beats canon's STM lineup out there in terms of range of focal from UWA to tele for a kit. the rebels are fairly compact, weigh less than canon's xxD series cameras or above, and Canon's EF-S STM lenses are the best bang for the buck out there. you can walk away with the 24, 50, 10-18 , 18-135, 55-250 and have a credible kit and not cost a significant amount of money.

I'd argue that someone getting a T6s as a starting point and expanding their APS-C kit from there is a pretty good decision and alot more informed than your post.

I think it depends on what you value. Some folks buy a camera with a kit lens and never expect to buy another lens. Some of those folks value what is in the box on day one as that's all they'll ever own. In that light, an a6000 with 11 fps might make more sense than a T6i.

That said rrc, I personally agree with you. I always advise folks to go Canon or Nikon with a first ILC purchase as the ecosystem is bigger, it is future proofed for accessory / lens options, quality is better, you may know someone already with one who might loan you a lens, etc.

But my opinions are those of an overthinky enthusiast and do not for a moment represent the bread and butter prospective Rebel or D5500 buyer.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

for a one lens setup it doesn't make sense to get ANY ILC camera.

the entire point of an ILC is to switch lenses.

Whoa, disagree on this one. Some people get ILCs strictly for responsiveness reasons (principally for pictures of their children), which an OVF/mirror setup does best --> so they buy an SLR.

Unless there is a fixed lens modern DSLR on the market that I am not aware of, those folks will likely get a Rebel or D5500.

- A

 

[Luds34]

for a one lens setup it doesn't make sense to get ANY ILC camera.

the entire point of an ILC is to switch lenses.

Whoa, disagree on this one. Some people get ILCs strictly for responsiveness reasons (principally for pictures of their children), which an OVF/mirror setup does best --> so they buy an SLR.

Unless there is a fixed lens modern DSLR on the market that I am not aware of, those folks will likely get a Rebel or D5500.

- A

Absolutely, I know of many casual shooters who bought a DSLR because it shoots "instantly" and allows them to photography their kids.

 

[AvTvM]

or you are making a poor and uninformed observation.

nothing beats canon's STM lineup out there in terms of range of focal from UWA to tele for a kit. the rebels are fairly compact, weigh less than canon's xxD series cameras or above, and Canon's EF-S STM lenses are the best bang for the buck out there. you can walk away with the 24, 50, 10-18 , 18-135, 55-250 and have a credible kit and not cost a significant amount of money.

Canon EOS M3 is much better choice than any rebel. Smaller body, less vibration, less noise, less intrusive, same capabilities (with optional EVF).

Canon EF-M lenses cover essentially the same focal range as EF-S lenses at less bulk, typically lower price and many have even somewhat higher IQ

EF-M 11-22 >>> cheaper and better than >>>> EF-S 10-18 and 10-22
EF-M 18-55 KIT >>> slightly smaller and slightly better than >>> EF-S 18-55 IS STM
EF-M 18-150 >>> more compact and more reach and equal IQ and lower price than >>> EF-S 18-135
EF-M 22/2.0 >>> 1 stop faster and better IQ than >>> EF-S 24/2.8 pancake
EF-M 28/2.8 Macro >> with LED light >>> no such thing in EF-S [but EF-S 60 Macro]
EF-M 50-200 >>> a lot more compact but 50mm less reach and 1/2 stop slower at long end than >>> EF-S 55-250

And with tghe EF-M/EF adapter you can also use any EF-S/EF lens without loss of fucntionality, especially those with STM AF drive.

So EOS M is much smarter choice than mirrorslapper rebel.

 

[rrcphoto]

or you are making a poor and uninformed observation.

nothing beats canon's STM lineup out there in terms of range of focal from UWA to tele for a kit. the rebels are fairly compact, weigh less than canon's xxD series cameras or above, and Canon's EF-S STM lenses are the best bang for the buck out there. you can walk away with the 24, 50, 10-18 , 18-135, 55-250 and have a credible kit and not cost a significant amount of money.

Canon EOS M3 is much better choice than any rebel.

except it's slower fps, smaller battery, smaller built in flash, doesn't have a fully articulated screen, is less comfortable to hold for some,etc,etc.

however yes - canon has replicated the EF-S in the EF-M ecosystem.

however I presumed the person i was replying to was suggesting "better" mirrorless cameras.